Maybe, but one should never put too much credence in what's said by the talking heads, especially four years after the fact. These stories make for good press. It's the first I've heard about Chara being upset by the Hossa trade, and yes, I live in Ottawa.

Alex116

Posted - 04/05/2012 : 23:44:57

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Always more to a story than whats meets the eye Alex. Things like this make sense.

As to not staying because Ott wouldn`t make him team captain, thats ridiculous, too foolish to even talk about.

Basically Muckler gained Heatley...but lost Hossa and Chara because of it. Most likely lost a stanley cup because of this too.

I'd have to agree, i don't buy the "i wanna be captain" thing whatsoever!

The Duke

Posted - 04/05/2012 : 19:28:04 Always more to a story than whats meets the eye Alex. Things like this make sense.

As to not staying because Ott wouldn`t make him team captain, thats ridiculous, too foolish to even talk about.

Basically Muckler gained Heatley...but lost Hossa and Chara because of it. Most likely lost a stanley cup because of this too.

@valanche

Posted - 04/05/2012 : 07:37:55 i think his biggest mistake was allowing him to sign with a division rival he should have traded his rights to the western conference

66 is > than 99

Alex116

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 22:25:33 Duke.....my whole point is that there were more reason's for the Sens not resigning Chara, than simply "Muckler was too stupid". Here, have a read of this. This is a blog entry by an Ottawa guy from their local radio station. Seems there was far more to it than what we've discussed here.

The biggest problem with the way Muckler handled it was getting nothing in return for him when he left as a free agent.

The Duke

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 20:50:25 Sorry Alex, forgot to mention...i do see your point that one had to go but.... unlike the Burke draft pick fiasco...which blew up in his face....

Difference is that Burke gambled on the unknown.....Muckler had 2 knowns in front of his face, Redden and Chara. I agree that Redden was playing well at the time but offensive defense can be replaced....question is ....

Who the hell can you pick up to replace Chara ???? This guy is a coaches and GM`s dream player. A giant who can play hockey and play it well....also with offensive upside...

Guys like Chara are a once in a lifetime opportunity for GM`s, they don`t come along everyday and Muckler was too stupid to see it, he should have locked him up with a fat contract. The Chara`s of the world keep coaches and GM`s jobs safe.

The Duke

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 20:40:03 Alex i watched a TONNNNN of Ottawa vs Leafs while Chara played there. If Muckler couldn`t see the player Chara was going to become after watching him for 3 years...no wonder he got fired.

I`m sure every leaf and ottawa fan in Canada knew the player he was going to become.

Does anyone really believe that Chara wouldn`t stay in ottawa unless they made him captain ?? come on...

Bottom line...Ottawa wouldn`t pay...$$$ talks...bulls**t walks

Alex116

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 19:19:59

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Alex116...i don`t think its silly at all to claim that i would not have given up on Chara.

I believe that, 90% of knowledgeable hockey fans, ( not only myself ) would NEVER give up on a 6` 9``...260 lb monster who can totally control a hockey game.

When did Redden start going down hill anyway ?? After Chara left maybe.

Duke....now you're saying that you would not "give up on Chara". In your original post, it was all about only being able to afford one of them! Now, read the comments from the two Ottawa Senator fans that follow your last post. Now you'll see the real scenario. Now maybe you'll see my point that at the time, most agreed with the decision they made. Kinda like Burke not realizing that his picks he traded for Kessel would be so high, Muckler had no way of telling that Redden would lose his game so suddenly and Chara would become the goon stud he is today!

Guest2187

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 14:25:20 I also agree with Girardi, very underrated, along with Mcdonaugh (sp) who has been a pleasant surprise aquired from the Gomez deal.

Guest2187

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 14:22:13

quote:Originally posted by Sensfan101

quote:Originally posted by Clatts

quote:Originally posted by Guest2187

Three guys who don't get very much attention that should definitely be taken into consideration are Josh Gorges, Nicklas Kronwall, and I may be a little bias since I am a Jets fan, but it has been a treat to watch Mark Stuart play this year. Looks like one of the toughest defensemen to play against night in and night out. He doesn't take a game off here and there like the other guys on the team and plays with his heart on his sleeve. The other two are so valuable to their teams as well.

Josh Gorges? It's hard to put 'best defender' and 'worst team in the east in the same sentence'

Nick Kronwall? I think you meant Nick Lidstorm

Mark Stuart? I like you meant Shea Weber

"Most of the guys that wear them are Europeans and French Guys."Don Cherry on Visors

No I think he meant exactly who he said. Just because he has a different opinion doesn't mean it is wrong. I think the guys he posted are alll excellent defenders. Remeber the question is not best defenseman.

You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky

Thats correct. I'm not stupid, I know who the obvious choices would be, just saying that these guys are all about the defensive side of the game. Sure lidstrom is hard to play against because of his on ice intelligence, but I believe the best defender would have to be someone who is tough to play against physically as well. I did take into account blocked shots, ice time, hits etc. and just wanted to throw out some dark horses who I think don't get the credit they deserve because they don't put up the points. And sure I know gorges is on the worst team, but he is a plus player and logs huge mins. playing against the leagues top offensive players. As for Stuart, he just does all the little things and would be an asset to any blue line.

JOSHUACANADA

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 14:02:06 I remember how the signings went down. Redden at the time was a long standing Ottawa player with better offensive stats considered better defensively and an assistant captain. He signed for less than Chara was asking and Ottawa could only afford one.

Chara on the otherside was a 3rd year player who hadn't rounded into form yet and had a habit of making dumb mistakes. Mistakes such as fighting in a game when playoffs secured with a non playoff team and breaking his hand making him unavailable for the first round. Redden played in those playoffs and was the best player on the ice for the series loss against the Buffalo Sabres. Chara wanted more money and as said before wanted a captain role with the team which sported many other players whom management felt were better leaders.

Hindsight 20/20 Redden's play faultered and Chara's improved dramatically and Ottawa lost both players. At the time Muckler made the smart play.

Sensfan101

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 13:00:50 Everyone says Ottawa made a horrible decision in keeping Chara over Redden but they don't know the whole story. Zdeno Chara said the only way he would stay in Ottawa was if he was made captain. Obviously with Alfie there, their was no way Muckler could keep him.

You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky

The Duke

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 12:37:09 Alex116...i don`t think its silly at all to claim that i would not have given up on Chara.

I believe that, 90% of knowledgeable hockey fans, ( not only myself ) would NEVER give up on a 6` 9``...260 lb monster who can totally control a hockey game.

When did Redden start going down hill anyway ?? After Chara left maybe.

Guest1710

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 11:23:15 Best defender in the NHL is probably Dan Girardi if you are talking straight defense (blocks, hits, ice time, in your face, smart outs, takeaways)... But if you are including the offensive aspect of a defenseman I'd have to say a healthy Kris Letang is the most well rounded.

Guest3524

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 05:40:18

quote:Originally posted by Alex116

[...Let's face it, the Sens would have been FAR better off keeping Chara in the long run, but to imply that you would have made what turns out to be the right decision is really silly! What's that hindsight is 20/20 stuff they talk about????

True, hindsight four years later makes it look worse. They looked much more even at the time. Redden had up seasons and down seasons throughout his career and had just finished an up season when he was re-signed.

There was a lot of debate in town on which one to keep knowing one had to go. When he was on his game, Redden was fantastic, but when he was off, he made some pretty dumb mistakes. Chara was always pretty steady. Really good defenders are almost invisible because they make it look easy. They're not flashy like the Karlssons of the game, so they don't get the attention. Redden was an offensive style defenceman and a fan favourite (especially with the women) which probably influenced the decision.

For what it's worth, I thought at the time that Chara was the man to keep, so I can afford the smug attitude knowing I was right all along.

Alex116

Posted - 04/04/2012 : 00:45:01

quote:Originally posted by Guest9558

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Didn`t Ottawa at the time actually choose Redden over Chara ?? I remember something about how they couldn`t afford them both ( cap or whatever ) so they kept Redden and let Chara walk...lmao

That was it, keeping both would have put them over the the cap, so they chose Reddin over Chara. Reddin is still on the Ranger's payroll for a couple more years. I guess Muckler isn't the only dumb-*** GM.

Duke / 9558..............I don't recall everything around this decision, nor obvoiusly do i know either of your opinions AT THE TIME, but i do recall Redden being a pretty solid dman at the time. Let's face it, the Sens would have been FAR better off keeping Chara in the long run, but to imply that you would have made what turns out to be the right decision is really silly! What's that hindsight is 20/20 stuff they talk about????

Guest9558

Posted - 04/03/2012 : 20:17:08

quote:Originally posted by The Duke

Didn`t Ottawa at the time actually choose Redden over Chara ?? I remember something about how they couldn`t afford them both ( cap or whatever ) so they kept Redden and let Chara walk...lmao

That was it, keeping both would have put them over the the cap, so they chose Reddin over Chara. Reddin is still on the Ranger's payroll for a couple more years. I guess Muckler isn't the only dumb-*** GM.

The Duke

Posted - 04/03/2012 : 20:07:50 Guest 9558, you are right about Chara..Ottawa has never been the same team since they let Chara walk...

What a dumb - a$$ decision by their management...if memory serves me correctly...

Didn`t Ottawa at the time actually choose Redden over Chara ?? I remember something about how they couldn`t afford them both ( cap or whatever ) so they kept Redden and let Chara walk...lmao

Sensfan101

Posted - 04/03/2012 : 14:55:09

quote:Originally posted by Clatts

quote:Originally posted by Guest2187

Three guys who don't get very much attention that should definitely be taken into consideration are Josh Gorges, Nicklas Kronwall, and I may be a little bias since I am a Jets fan, but it has been a treat to watch Mark Stuart play this year. Looks like one of the toughest defensemen to play against night in and night out. He doesn't take a game off here and there like the other guys on the team and plays with his heart on his sleeve. The other two are so valuable to their teams as well.

Josh Gorges? It's hard to put 'best defender' and 'worst team in the east in the same sentence'

Nick Kronwall? I think you meant Nick Lidstorm

Mark Stuart? I like you meant Shea Weber

"Most of the guys that wear them are Europeans and French Guys."Don Cherry on Visors

No I think he meant exactly who he said. Just because he has a different opinion doesn't mean it is wrong. I think the guys he posted are alll excellent defenders. Remeber the question is not best defenseman.

You miss 100 percent of the shots you don't take Wayne Gretzky

Guest9558

Posted - 04/03/2012 : 14:09:56 I wouldn't consider Karlsson the best defender, but his defensive play is improving.

Chara gets my vote. Ottawa had one of the best defences in the league until they let Chara walk. Now Boston has him and they have one of the best goals against record in the league and the best goal differential in the league. That's not all because of Timmy Thomas.

Clatts

Posted - 04/03/2012 : 05:03:55

quote:Originally posted by Guest2187

Three guys who don't get very much attention that should definitely be taken into consideration are Josh Gorges, Nicklas Kronwall, and I may be a little bias since I am a Jets fan, but it has been a treat to watch Mark Stuart play this year. Looks like one of the toughest defensemen to play against night in and night out. He doesn't take a game off here and there like the other guys on the team and plays with his heart on his sleeve. The other two are so valuable to their teams as well.

Josh Gorges? It's hard to put 'best defender' and 'worst team in the east in the same sentence'

Nick Kronwall? I think you meant Nick Lidstorm

Mark Stuart? I like you meant Shea Weber

"Most of the guys that wear them are Europeans and French Guys."Don Cherry on Visors

Guest9084

Posted - 04/03/2012 : 04:59:12 0342, the question was best defender, not best defenseman.

Guest0342

Posted - 04/03/2012 : 04:08:49 erik karlsson

The Duke

Posted - 04/02/2012 : 16:15:26 Those guys are good guest..but the question simply is...who is the best ??

One answer.

I wouldn`t exactly put these players in the same league as Weber and Dougthy or even Chara.

Guest2187

Posted - 04/02/2012 : 13:58:28 Three guys who don't get very much attention that should definitely be taken into consideration are Josh Gorges, Nicklas Kronwall, and I may be a little bias since I am a Jets fan, but it has been a treat to watch Mark Stuart play this year. Looks like one of the toughest defensemen to play against night in and night out. He doesn't take a game off here and there like the other guys on the team and plays with his heart on his sleeve. The other two are so valuable to their teams as well.

@valanche

Posted - 04/02/2012 : 11:22:31

quote:Originally posted by Alex116

@v...Not to be taken the wrong way. Not sure if you were around last year, but it was an ongoing joke about SOB and his talents. All in fun.

okay fair enough... i'm fairly new to the forum less than a year under my belt.

66 is > than 99

Alex116

Posted - 04/02/2012 : 07:39:19 @v...Not to be taken the wrong way. Not sure if you were around last year, but it was an ongoing joke about SOB and his talents. All in fun.

@valanche

Posted - 04/02/2012 : 07:36:49

quote:Originally posted by Alex116

quote:Originally posted by Guest4465

bobby orr

Besides, the obvious correct answer, is Shane O'brien.

come on now whats with the cheap shot.... he's had a pretty good year.

66 is > than 99

Guest7961

Posted - 04/02/2012 : 03:06:53 Herr BETTMAN he always on defence

The Duke

Posted - 04/01/2012 : 20:23:44 Shea Weber

Guest4178

Posted - 03/31/2012 : 11:47:44 Seeing Bobby Orr as an answer reminds me of a time in the 80's when someone asked an "old-time" hockey player how many goals Rocket Richard would score if he were playing in the 80's. (During the time when Gretzky was putting up huge numbers, and others were too.)

The answer came back that he would probably only score around 40 goals, whereupon the interviewer asked in disbelief how come so few at a time when there were at least a half dozen players getting 50 or more goals a season.

For which came the following response...

"Well, Rocket Richard is a little over 60 years old now, so he might not score as many goals as he did when he was in his prime, even in a watered down league."

Alex116

Posted - 03/31/2012 : 11:19:52

quote:Originally posted by Guest4465

bobby orr

While this is better than your "Rolie the goalie" pick in that other thread, its still not very good, seeing as Orr isn't actually in the NHL anymore. Besides, the obvious correct answer, is Shane O'brien.

Guest4465

Posted - 03/31/2012 : 05:16:33 bobby orr

@valanche

Posted - 03/30/2012 : 14:25:42

quote:Originally posted by Beans15

Best signifies one, does it not??

I would say today, considering all facits of the game, Shea Weber is the best defensemen. He does nothing wrong, is strong, skates very well, has arguable the best slapshot in the NHL, plays in all situations very well, and play against the other teams best players all night long.

Honorable mention to Lidstrom who is on the downswing of his great career and to Chara who is every bit as good as Weber but lack the speed and mobility that Weber has.

in that case i'll go with pietrangelo. the best defender on the best defensive team. he may be slightly lower than the others i listed but his potential is unbelievable. i've seen him play in person wow is he good.

erik johnson became expendable when the blues saw that pietrangelo was a number 1 d-man at what 20 years of age. i wish the avs would have gotten him but i suppose johnson could still pan out to be elite.

66 is > than 99

Guest2872

Posted - 03/30/2012 : 10:13:55 I would have to agree with Weber. If I was starting a team he would be my first choice of D-men. BUT if I was playing one game it still might be Lidstrom with strong consideration going to a healthy Pronger (if that is still an possible!)

Beans15

Posted - 03/30/2012 : 09:48:12 Best signifies one, does it not??

I would say today, considering all facits of the game, Shea Weber is the best defensemen. He does nothing wrong, is strong, skates very well, has arguable the best slapshot in the NHL, plays in all situations very well, and play against the other teams best players all night long.

Honorable mention to Lidstrom who is on the downswing of his great career and to Chara who is every bit as good as Weber but lack the speed and mobility that Weber has.